From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>
Cc: rjw@rjwysocki.net, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Patch v3 2/2] x86/acpi: Remove the repeated lapic address override entry parsing
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2016 10:37:43 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160811083742.GA3645@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160810141340.GA5477@x1.redhat.com>
* Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 08/10/16 at 04:02pm, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > * Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > > ACPI MADT has a 32-bit field providing lapic address at which
> > > each processor can access its lapic information. MADT also contains
> > > an optional entry to provide a 64-bit address to override the 32-bit
> > > one. However the current code does the lapic address override entry
> > > parsing twice. One is in early_acpi_boot_init() because AMD NUMA need
> > > get boot_cpu_id earlier. The other is in acpi_boot_init() which parses
> > > all MADT entries.
> > >
> > > So in this patch remove the repeated code in the 2nd part. Meanwhile
> > > print lapic override entry information like other MADT entry, this
> > > will be added to boot log.
> >
> > it is not at all clear to me from this changelog whether the change is supposed to
> > change anything. If not then please spell it out explicitly:
> >
> > "This patch is not supposed to change any behavior."
>
> I don't know if adding new information to boot log can be seen as
> behavior change. If lapic override entry exist, the code change will
> add one line of message to boot log:
>
> LAPIC_ADDR_OVR (address[0xXXXXXXXX])
>
> If this is not behavior change, I will add the sentence you suggested.
Yeah, you can write it:
"This patch is not supposed to change any runtime behavior, other than
improving kernel messages."
Thanks,
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-08-11 8:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-07-30 11:10 [Patch v3 1/2] x86/mm/numa: Open code function early_get_boot_cpu_id Baoquan He
2016-07-30 11:10 ` [Patch v3 2/2] x86/acpi: Remove the repeated lapic address override entry parsing Baoquan He
2016-08-10 14:02 ` Ingo Molnar
2016-08-10 14:13 ` Baoquan He
2016-08-11 8:37 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2016-08-11 14:21 ` Baoquan He
2016-08-07 8:09 ` [Patch v3 1/2] x86/mm/numa: Open code function early_get_boot_cpu_id Baoquan He
2016-08-10 14:01 ` Ingo Molnar
2016-08-10 14:39 ` Baoquan He
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20160811083742.GA3645@gmail.com \
--to=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=bhe@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox